Person woman man camera TV
Person woman man camera TV
Because otherwise if you have too many small letters in a row it stops looking like a plural and more like a misspelled word. Because capitalization differences you can make more sense of As but not so much as.
“This hardware works fine and even has compatible software that it works great with. But I’m going to prefer the broken software for other reasons. And that means it’s the hardware’s fault.”
Software that is built to be compatible with a wide variety of hardware should be compatible with a wide variety of hardware.
If software can’t handle a 16.5:16 aspect ratio, then that’s bad software. I don’t care how weird of a niche thing that is… just make your software abstract enough to handle those cases.
It’s 2024, any resolution/aspect ratio/DPI combo should be supportable. There’s enough variety of monitors out there that we should have a solution for handling things on the fly without needing to have a predefined solution.
One of my (otherwise random) WoW guild members had my grandma as his kindergarten teacher.
https://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell
You’re not wrong, but a lot of time those webpages aren’t overengineered because the developer wanted it to be, but because the client kept making more and more demands.
If we assume “half a day” is 4 hours, and 500 pounds. That’s 125 pounds per hour. Which isn’t the worst rate. Assuming it’s actually capped at 4 hours and we all know that if it’s your dad’s friend, this is not going to be a set and forget kind of thing. So that 4 hours quickly becomes 10. And suddenly you’re down to 50 pounds per hour. And then if it’s actually static and simple and good, you still have high odds of getting insane feedback demanding changes to make it worse. A motherfucking website would actually be the best option, but wouldn’t get you paid. At that point youre just doing it for the lols.
But ultimately, this isn’t even about the rate or how much time this will take. this whole scenario depends heavily on the son here. Is the son unemployed and living in dad’s basement for free? Then yeah. Sorry, he should probably take any work he can get for any rate he can get. His dad gets a lot more say in how things work financially if the son is relying on him financially. But if the son is already working a full time job and living in his own house? Then no, I don’t care what the rate is. Don’t commandeer other people’s time. Don’t make deals that people haven’t agreed to. Come to me with opportunities, not demands.
Apparently it works retroactively and now you are on Windows.
Should they? Yes. They should also be searching for previous bug reports. I’m sure a lot of people do. But if you have enough users, even if 1% of people don’t use good reporting behaviors, you wind up with a lot of duplicate or bad reports.
There are plenty of blog posts out there that basically can be summarized as talking about how grueling open source work can be because users are often aggressive in their demands.
But this is a prime example of debian “stable” doesn’t mean “no crashes” but instead it means “unchanging, which means any bugs and crashes will remain for the whole release”
Except this isn’t true at all.
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2024-6387
Regresshion impacted bookworm and trixie both. Buster was too old.
With the downside of me doing an apt update and seeing that openssh-server was on 1:9.2p1-2+deb12u3
and I had no idea at a glance if this included the fix or not (qualys’s page states version 8.5p1-9.8p1 were vulnerable).
If you are running debian bookworm or trixie, you absolutely should update your openssh-server package.
Because the dev gets a huge number of bug reports for bugs that were resolved 5 versions ago.
They actually asked debian to stop shipping the screensaver, because they were getting tired of saying “this is already fixed, debian is just not going to ship the fix for another year”. Debian didn’t want to stop, so the dev added the nag screen, because it was the only way to stop the flood of bug reports for things that were already fixed.
That didn’t take long.
my rant was not about your meme. But people actually use this argument seriously, and that frustrates me.
And I will admit that learning a new system has a time cost, but once you reach experience parity, the time cost per problem is less, and the number of problems is less. In that way, the “time spent” is an investment rather than wasted.
So A+ meme, it triggered me in all the ways it was supposed to.
Don’t have to spend time troubleshooting if you just never fix the BSOD and just kinda live with it. Point for windows
The thing I hate about the “value your time” argument is that windows is shit.
Let’s be generous for a minute and assume that windows and linux have the same amount of problems. Someone who is on windows for the past 30 years has 30 years of acquired knowledge and will probably know quickly how to solve it on windows, but not linux. Someone who is on linux for the past 30 years has 30 years of acquired knowledge and will probably know quickly how to solve it on linux, but not windows.
So the entire argument is just “but I have muscle memory tied to windows, and I already know how to solve those problems, but I dont know how to solve the linux ones, so they take me a lot of research and time to solve, therefore all linux problems always take a lot more time to solve”
On windows, I have to spend time fighting BSODs and finding out where to download software from that isn’t just bloated up with viruses, and how to run registry hacks to get rid of start menu ads and to stop microsoft from phoning home. None of those things i have to do on linux.
On linux, today my biggest issue was figuring out how to change the keybinding for taking a screenshot… And that was an easy issue, but it’s also not even possible on windows.
So I guess different types of problems. My “wasted” time is customizing my OS/environment so it works the way I want it to, not trying to fight back any ounce of control.
Sure. but there are plenty of reasons to not read other than “uneducated”. And associating ability to focus with intelligence and education isn’t fair either.
If an American couldn’t tell me how many states there are, I would question their intelligence or education.
If an American told me that they don’t read books, I would just assume they find books boring.
I also hate “reading a book” as a proxy metric for intelligence. I know plenty of cultured smart people who watch documentaries but don’t read. And I know some dense, not that bright people who read a lot of Twilight style books.
You’re right. There are multiple definitions of the word stable, and “unchanging” is a valid one of them.
It’s just that every where else I’ve seen it in computing, it refers to a build of something being not-crashy enough to actually ship. “Can’t be knocked over” sort of stability. And everyone I’ve ever talked to outside of Lemmy has assumed that was what “stable” meant to Debian. but it doesn’t. It just means “versions won’t change so you won’t have version compatibility issues, but you’ll also be left with several month to year old software that wasn’t even up to date when this version released, but at least you don’t have to think about the compatibility issues!”
Debian aims for rock solid stability
To be clear, Debian “stability” refers to “unchanging packages”, not “doesn’t crash.” Debian would rather ship a known bug for a year than update the package if it’s not explicitly a security bug (and then only certain packages).
So if you have a crash in Debian, you will always have that crash until the next version of debian a year or so from now. That’s not what I’d consider “stable” but rather “consistent”
IMO it doesn’t matter. People don’t read news on updates. Should they? Yes. Do they? No. Should they have to? Also no.
Linus’s point is to never blame the end user for something the kernel changed. If you want software to have widespread adoption, adding homework to simple updates isn’t how you do it. People don’t want a hobby or something to babysit, they want an operating system. Debian will go out of their way to make in-release updates go as smooth as possible, but are willing to through out entire parts of functioning packages between releases.
But this isn’t even about breaking things for the end user. This will create excessive amounts of noise on the upstream repo. People will say “Hey! My keepassxc broke!” and they report it to keepassxc, and not to Debian. To which keepassxc just has to constantly reply “no, debian changed this on you, this is not a bug.” If Debian had to deal with the fall out of their own decisions, I would say “yeah, im not sure if i agree with the decision, but oh well”… But they are increasing the workload for other teams.
It is already happening. The debian dev’s stance is “This will be painful for a year.” But it will be painful for keepassxc, NOT debian. The keepassxc devs asked them to not do this. Debian’s response might as well be “Im inflicting this pain on you, even though you’ve asked me not to. But on the plus side, it won’t hurt me at all and it will only last a year for you.” If they really have that much disdain for the project, they should just stop packaging it altogether.
So yeah, debian has the legal right to do whatever they want because keepassxc is open source. but “just because I can, and you cant legally stop me, and its extra work for you, not me” is kind of a jerk move. This is what drives FOSS contributors to get burnt out and abandon otherwise good projects.
They’re just trying to keep government small and out of your business… or something